Iran tried to assassinate one of Netanyahu's sons, prime minister says
By Sophie Naimi ·
The most dangerous thing a politician can do is convince us that their personal safety—their family’s life—is inextricably linked to the stability of the state, or indeed, to…
The Unbelievable Matter and the Price of Protection
The most dangerous thing a politician can do is convince us that their personal safety—their family’s life—is inextricably linked to the stability of the state, or indeed, to their continued tenure in power. This week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has orchestrated precisely such an illusion. On August 24, 2026, calling for restraint during his election campaign, he made a dramatic claim: that Iran attempted to assassinate one of his sons. The sheer weight of the language—"Iran tried to murder one of my sons"—is designed not merely to inform, but to paralyze with fear.
The reporting is meticulous in its collection of these claims. Infobae and ABC Color confirm that Netanyahu stated this threat during a call broadcast on Channel 14, noting the alleged target was either Avner or Yair. Furthermore, sources like Asharq Al-Awsat reveal that this dramatic revelation served to justify an extension of personal protection for his wife, Sara, and his two sons, citing David Zini, Shin Bet chief, as having approved the necessary security arrangements. The narrative is perfectly constructed: external threat (Iran) necessitates internal control (Shin Bet approval), which in turn justifies political survival (the election campaign). As Yonhap notes, he emphasized that "this protection is not a luxury."
When Security Becomes Political Currency
What we are witnessing is the oldest trick in the book: weaponizing existential threat to secure temporal power. The alleged assassination plot—which was reportedly known to Israeli security services for months but subject to military censorship—is less about Iranian capability and more about Netanyahu’s political necessity. He needs this narrative because it provides a moral imperative for the continuation of his own protective bubble.
This pattern is not unique to Jerusalem, nor is it limited by geography or ideology. It echoes the mechanisms of the Cuban Missile Crisis. In 13 days in October 1962, the perceived threat of catastrophic nuclear war—the Soviet missiles in Cuba—was leveraged to force an immediate and profound political concession from a powerful adversary (and indeed, between two superpowers). The shared mechanism is clear: when faced with overwhelming, abstract danger, leaders do not seek de-escalation through diplomacy; they demand absolute, unquestioned compliance regarding the status quo of power. They use the threat to freeze time, making any alternative political path seem like an immediate descent into chaos and death.
The Cost of Perpetual Fear
The true cost here is never measured in missiles or millions of dollars spent on bodyguards; it is measured in the erosion of democratic accountability. When a leader establishes that their survival—and by extension, the stability of the state—depends entirely on maintaining an impenetrable shell of security against phantom enemies, they effectively tell the electorate: you cannot question my methods, because to do so might invite disaster.
The rhetoric deployed here is not about national defense; it is about institutionalizing personal privilege. The fact that this protection extension was approved by a Ministerial Committee for Security Affairs—a body whose recommendations are framed by fear and secrecy—shows how the apparatus of state security has become merely an adjunct to political ambition. We must look past the headlines detailing alleged plots against sons, and instead focus on the underlying transaction: power exchanged for perpetual danger.
The illusion Netanyahu is peddling—that his continued rule is contingent upon this elaborate web of protection—is a classic maneuver in the history of unstable regimes. It demands that we accept a state where the highest political stakes are always framed as matters of life and death, thereby rendering any challenge to power inherently treasonous. The only way out of this cycle is to refuse the premise: that security can be granted by decree, or maintained through perpetual fear.
Sources
- Times of India: ‘Iran tried to murder my son’: Netanyahu makes big claim against Tehran
- Infobae: Netanyahu asegura que Irán intentó asesinar a uno de sus hijos
- ABC Color: Netanyahu asegura que Irán intentó asesinar a uno de sus hijos
- Asharq Al-Awsat: نتنياهو يكشف أن إيران حاولت اغتيال أحد أبنائه
- G1 Globo: Premiê de Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu diz que Irã tentou matar um dos filhos dele
- Yonhap: 네타냐후 "이란, 내 아들 암살 시도"…경호 유지 정당성 강조